I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me?
Level: 5
CS Original
| PETER JOSEPH SELF-PROCLAIMED ALIEN FROM OUTERSPACE! OBSERVE PETER'S WORD SALADS AND ALL OUT NONSENSICAL CRAZINESS!
As far as culmination, TZM was an experiment upon conception. I am a skeptic but also optimistic. I consider myself abstractly an alien from another planet, here to observe earthly reality in a detached way. I had no idea anything would happen when the call for TZM was made in Zeitgeist: Addendum and I really didn't have a vested interest either way.
Peter uses truncated in a sentence.
And finally, to complete this truncated example, we have (e) Recycling & Disposal. Trash is a false concept.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Peter Joseph interview by Grant J. Kidney (audio version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV93Bvk9lys
http://web.archive.org/web/20130214140900/http://grantjkidney.com/peterjosephinterview/
"THE STATE EXISTS TO PRESERVE THE ECONOMIC INSTITUTION AT ALL COSTS": ZEITGEIST DIRECTOR PETER JOSEPH
Published December 23, 2012
Grant J. Kidney -- The following is my exclusive interview with filmmaker Peter Joseph. Peter is the creator of the popular Zeitgeist film series, a set of explosive documentaries seen by millions of people from around the world.
Peter is also the founder of the Zeitgeist Movement, a global sustainability organization advocating a new, holistic direction for humanity devoid of the mechanisms of politics, war, and inequality.
GJK: The Zeitgeist Movement advocates a world restructured according to certain natural principles. In a broad scope, explain the unnatural elements of this present system and what the Zeitgeist Movement offers as an alternative.
PJ: First of all, let us dispense with all names, labels and institutional associations when considering this data. I denote this not for some annoyingly intellectual abstraction regarding what "knowledge" is or the epistemological basis of development and perpetuation - but for the practical purpose of ensuring that those reading this interview really understand that no institution, person or figure holds any weight when it comes to the "organism" of knowledge which culminates from us all and our increasingly efficient tools.
The "Train of Thought" that rests at the foundation of The Zeitgeist Movement exists on its own and, in many ways, TZM is an arbitrary entity on that level, serving merely to communicate this already existing awareness trend which has been serially realized and generated from the "Group Mind" since the dawn of human history.
Of course, as with anything in the categorical thought process, we create "nouns" to represent ideas... which are, in reality, actually 'emergent', yet perpetuate the false illusion that what those categorical distinctions express are static. This is a serious problem in human comprehension and it has only been until recent developments in scientific thought that the "bridging of everything" is starting to take place across all known fields. The very basis of Science rests, in part, on this 'emergence' and 'symbiosis'.
That aside, TZM focuses on two specific observations which, in the most obvious and practical terms, relate to what you refer to as the "unnatural elements" of the present system. (1) The first, very simply, is that we have problem solving capabilities in the modern day which are going unapplied due to not only the inefficiency inherent to the current model of economy - but are also blocked by the value system/incentive disorder generated from the aforementioned inherent inefficiency itself.
For example, numerous studies on global poverty have shown that it has nothing to do with the technical capacity of food production or distribution. Rather, it has to do with the scarcity and profit "rules" inherent to the Monetary-Market Economy. The very idea of "equality" is anathema to the Market System. The class divisions we see are inherent and, simply put, the greater the equality, the less efficient the market.
Peter Joseph, "the elites of history ALWAYS think the positions they hold and the state of class division is somewhat 'divine'..."
As an aside, James Madison, a huge influence on the creation of the US Constitution wrote, in effect, that democracy must be limited so the poor have less rights for, if they did have more say, they would naturally revise the economic laws to gain some of the immense "wealth of the nation" - the "wealth of the nation" which should "always be in control", to paraphrase Madison.
It is rather depressing how "patriotic" Americans in the lower classes, often touting their "freedom" and "anti-socialistic" paranoia, have no idea that the United States, the ostensible pinnacle of "democracy", was actually built upon class elitism and oppression in many ways with the guiding philosophy being "economic" - not "democratic" or even "political" - when you really think about it.
The grand illusion, of course, is that we can have "equality" in the citizenry on the political/democratic level in the wake of constant, inherent economic inequality and class warfare. Capitalism was realized as a system of social oppression to perpetuate a form of intuitive social darwinism that began during the age of Pharaohs... on to Kings and Feudalism, to Mercantilism, and then to its most sophisticated form of oppression - an oppression which gives the placating illusion of choice and freedom - the "free-enterprise" scam.
As another aside, please note that these values of elitism are never thought about this way, however - the elites of history ALWAYS think the positions they hold and the state of class division is somewhat "divine" and that they are in the privileged position to take care of the rest. The intent is never truly malicious - it is always justified as an end-over-means process of rationalization and the very nature of modern economic thought, which rewards only a ruthless, narrow self-interest, serves this pattern well.
The values generated by the normative assumption of "success", meaning material rewards (house/cars/status), is what keeps everyone on the treadmill of covert slavery. That psychological mechanism is found nowhere in prior social systems and is why the capitalist concept is so incredibly hard to shut down... as it is now self-perpetuating in its value associations.
Even the term Political Economy is often not understood for what it really means historically. The political basis of all nations today are born not out of the interest in human participation on the level of social decision making - they are born out of the premise and mechanics of economy put forward by Locke, Smith, Ricardo, Malthus and other "fathers" of the free-market system and these men understood clearly that inequality was to be a "given" to the system they advocated.
So, back to my point and example, poverty could never be resolved in the current system model because it is impossible to resolve due to the very mechanics of it (scarcity/imbalance needed for competitive advantage), coupled with the value- system disorder inherent to the psychology that is born out of it.
This is rooted not only in the historical understanding/basis of its culmination but also in the very manner of its unfolding. This might explain as well why recent studies have shown that more wealthy people are usually more dishonest, rude and self-entitled. It also explains why the poor and middle class give enormously higher %s of their income to charity than the rich do on average and volunteer to help without payment more than the wealthy do.
(2)The second observation highlighted in TZM's work is the immense possibility that exists for human well-being, public health, personal exploration and, in effect, higher order human interests/relationships/understandings if we could only overcome the monotonous, wasteful drudgery standardized in the culture today.
People talk about "freedom" in the Western world as though they have any in real terms. The average person spends most of their life sleeping and working - the working part existing in a clearly fascist corporate structure. I don't use the term fascist loosely. The entire idea of a business/corporation is as undemocratic and hierarchical as you could possibly get in its present form and it embodies class warfare and exploitation by it very design. This is freedom?
As an aside, many today also associate freedom to privatization and the need to reduce state interference/interaction. Well, at least the State has historically pretended to be democratic. The privatization of government though the allocating of most operations to the "free-market" is one of the most oppressive and undemocratic things possible... yet in the "double think" world we live in people think this is the best manner of conduct and that any true organizing body ("State") is inherently tyrannical. Note: I am not advocating one or the other as they exist at all. It isn't a duality as there are much better ways which go unseen by most critics.
And one final point on this tangent, if you may, is the delusion that State interference is the cause of all problems and if only the free enterprise could truly be "free", Adam Smith's invisible hand would shine. We see this delusion continue in the modern derivations of Smith/Ricardo and the like with the "Chicago" and "Austrian School" mutations.
Firstly, all free-market interests seek monopoly. Period. That is the whole point and no level playing field exists without some State intervention. Second, the protectionist policies put forward by the State to reduce the market system in favor of their associated interests are, in fact, core tactics of the competitive market tool-kit!!! It is a basic, logical tactic. What would you expect? All corporations would seek protectionist policies given the chance and if they need to pay a few lobbyists to make that happen - that is good business. Blocking more advanced electronic imports from Japan to further secure market share for a given domestic US Sector is not a limitation of the "free-market" - it IS the free-market at work.
So next time someone tells you that we "do not have a free-market!", explain to them that there is no such possible thing in abstraction as competition in the market has and will always invade/become the Government, one way or another, and no judge, lawyer, court, senator, congressman, president or official will ever successfully counter this force. Ever. Why? Because this mode of Economics is what created the Political System as we know it to begin with!
Then there is the inherent coercion of the financial and debt system to force people into submission by default. The old illusion that this system allows for "choice" as though it is really "voluntary" is absurd. It is, again, a post-modern slavery system cut and dry where only now the slaves are not housed by their owners - they are given subsistence to fend for themselves, under the guise, again, that they have a "choice". Coupled with this pressure are many structural safe guards to ensure the poor/lower class have no chance for large scale influence... But I won't go on that tangent.
Ranting aside, the punch line is that is it now self-generating as the Anti-System, Pro-Market Anarchy idea has been sold, accepted and/or forced by Western Military Imperialism (also a natural consequence of the ever expanding, competitive market economy) to the whole world, with the false duality that any kind of planning/systems/cooperation approach to human organization, regardless of the problem solving efficiency clearly available and advancement of abundance and public health, is the recipe for total annihilation and tyranny.
So, coming back to the main point, TZM is showing people what is now possible with respect to known advancements in human, social & technological sciences, with the underlying theme that we can have it if we want it... but it will take radical change. We can solve an enormous number of problems and satisfy every humans' basic needs. We can also extrapolate rapidly increasing potentials to see how amazing life could be if we let down our guard for a moment and begin to see that the social model we are enduring today is not only outdated in its methods, it is producing outdated, distorted values and assumptions constantly- which keep it in place.
As a final point, I could ramble off a great deal regarding the public health and ecological turmoil in the world today which is a direct result of the, as you put it, "unnatural elements" of the current model. While material wealth has increased in the rich West so have mental disorders, violence and general disease. The stress induced has a multifaceted effect and such illnesses are set to only grow as the population becomes more decoupled from reality, anxious, depressed and the like.
These psycho-social effects invariably increase heart attack rates and other correlated sicknesses, while the methods of industry, with its cost-efficiency premise, continue to produce food stuffs and products that knowingly cause cancer/illness, not to mention disregard the long term environmental effects almost universally.
The "green wash" phenomenon is really interesting to me as there it literally no such thing as a "green" business in the world today. It is technically impossible for any business to be truly "green". Regarding the natural laws of both the human organism and the habitat would mean to conform outright to its rules and to do so would force waste reduction and efficiency to such a level that the market economy simply wouldn't work. It would have no more "growth".
Also, given the exponentially advancing state of technology which has the capacity to automate labor for increased efficiency and safety, not to mention increase adaptable, high endurance goods themselves which would nullify the repeat purchases needed to keep the monetary-market system afloat, the system could not keep enough people employed or maintain the angles of advantage needed by the rules of competition to operate.
Very simply: To truly respect Nature in industrial practice would collapse the entire market economy overnight as the anarchy and disorder inherent would be definitively unacceptable. There is no respect for the earth "system" in the market order at all and only a "planned system" would suffice to come in harmony with Nature. Why? Because nature is a system bound by strict, interlinked laws and to respect these laws and their casualty and relationships implies mirroring the "planned" system structure itself... which is what nature is.
Put another way, our Socioeconomic System is "decoupled" from the nature world, meaning that it cannot allow certain resolutions or human/ecological considerations which scientifically would lead to problem resolution, prosperity, and, in effect, balance with the natural governing laws of our habitat.
As far as the final section of your question: What does TZM offer as an alternative? - I have already answered your question. We offer the Train of Thought awareness first and foremost and like Logic/Mathematics, it has a life of its own. The hope is that these basic principles of sustainability will be realized for their immutable importance and we, the human family, will start to adapt to not only solve critical problems - but also expand possibility and prosperity for higher order human consciousness... not to mention gain social/ecological stability.
TZM works via a Chapter Network with various global and regional projects to get this kind of information in the public domain. The real revolution is a revolution of consciousness and hence values. Please see the TZM Orientation at www.thezeitgeistmovement.com
GJK: The Zeitgeist Movement proposes that most of the world's problems are of a technical nature. List one example of a technically oriented challenge that exists today and how this obstacle might be overcome in a world optimally redesigned.
PJ: Since I briefly addressed poverty in the prior question's answer, which is fairly straight forward given the fact that is it clear we have the means to feed everyone "technically" and solve the epidemic, I will select another, deliberately more complex circumstance for consideration: The Waste/Pollution Epidemic. This response will address, in effect, the inevitably needed 'Systems Approach' to societal governance on the Industrial level.
As many know, the West's "throw away" materialistic lifestyle (which has been held in high esteem as a victory of the "American Dream") has been heavily criticized by other developing regions, many of which are now serving as Western good landfills, such as certain developing nations. Billions of cell phones, computers and the like are rarely recycled in any viable manner, nor are they even designed to be. (Note that those goods that do have a platform for repair, such as an automobile, generate entire sub-industries of laborers that live off the inefficiency of that initial production. Keep that in mind as it alludes to another form of waste - labor waste - or the waste of human energy and time.)
In fact, some recent studies have found we are using more resources now per year than the earth actually produces in a year - clearly unsustainable. Intuitively, without examining the large scale inefficiency at play in industry today, it is also erroneously assumed that we are now 'over-populated', which is false.
Peter Joseph, "Goods are not designed to last. They are designed to fail."
While consumption itself has clearly increased as a vanity pressure over time, with a growing focus on material wealth/property as a measure of personal/social success, (consumption in American per person was half of what it is today a few decades ago) a relevant value distortion in many ways, it is really the process of "Business" inherent to the market system that is the problem. Thorstein Veblen referred to this as the "sabotage" of Industry. To be clear, industrial methods must conform to the internal logic of "Business" as guided by the Market Economy. This pollutes just about everything and "sabotages" technical efficiency.
To summarize/address this waste machine, let's start with (a) Extraction, (b) move to (b)Design, then to (c) Production; to (d) Distribution and then to (e) Recycling & Disposal in very general terms. Of course, there is a great deal in- between which could be considered as well so please do not view this as in any way comprehensive.
Regarding (a) Extraction, it is in this circumstance that we are bound by the regional location of the core raw materials. Iron Ore, Oil, Copper and the like all have specific regional locations which means, technology and specific extraction methods discounted, that the biggest issue for efficiency is transport from these locations. As will also be discussed regarding Distribution(d) in general, Globalization, or the marketization of the world economy and trade, wastes billions of barrels of oil and countless resources each year so such raw materials can make it all over the world to processing and production plants owned by private industry.
Extracting Coltan in Africa, shipping it for the production of electronics in China by cheap labor, for goods that are to be sold at profit in the United States market is just insane. Why does it happen? Because the root of Globalization - and hence the root of the capitalism mode of production - is, in part, the exploitation of cheap labor and land. This macroeconomic factor is little discussed in ecological activist circles.
"Market Efficiency", which is based upon gaining the best circumstance within the rules of trade and competition is actually opposed to "Technical Efficiency", which would demand that the distance between procedures for extraction, production and distribution be as small as possible at all times - basic Natural Law Logic. In a true industrial system not based on human exploitation and the constant quest to save "money", a streamlined, centralized 'systems' method for extraction and processing would occur, oriented around the inherent spacial logic surrounding areas holding core raw materials as a starting point. There are many other possible parameters to consider - but again, this is a generalization for the sake of conversation.
Next, we have (b) Design. Two Issues to understand: Intrinsic Obsolescence & Planned Obsolescence. The former has to do with the inherent inefficiency of any good coming out of the Market Economy. It is technically impossible to produce the strategically best good, taking into account the current state of knowledge at any given time, since the competitive basis of industrial interaction forces "cheaper" materials and processes in order for competing producers of the same good genre to stay profitable. Virtually all goods are mathematically inferior the moment that are created when compared to the true potential possible due to the need to compete against other producers.
Planned Obsolescence, on the other hand, is the deliberate withholding of efficiency to blatantly overcome "problematic" production efficiency now common. Today all companies produce not based on physical potential for endurance and lifespan, but with a strategy built out of the need to assure repeat purchases. Goods are not designed to last. They are design to fail. Clearly, this goes against every natural law consideration for sustainability on a finite planet you could find.
In a true economy, the entire basis of product design would be not only to make sure the utility is as optimized as possible, but that the physical characteristics of the goods were as durable and flexible as possible. Most electronic goods, for example, are tossed due to being relatively outdated or the failure of a few minor, replaceable parts.
While Moore's law, for example, does show that we are evolving our computational ability rapidly, indeed creating an ongoing, natural obsolescence, that does not mean the entire edifice of a given computerized good is to be discarded. That only serves "Business"(profit) - not "Industry"(efficiency). Strategic updating of existing goods is a very rare phenomenon today in our consumerist, throw away world and, again, it is completely without technical logic, wasting human labor and resources.
Moving on to (3) Production. Much could be said on this issue but we will focus only on two things (a) Mechanization of Labor and (b) Corporate Multiplicity. Mechanization is the automation of human labor, a once distant hypothetical concern of classical economists that has turned into a living nightmare... at least for the integrity of traditional economic theory!
This has been the subject of vast debate with an enormous amount of "double- think". In my personal interactions, I have had people try to tell me that applied technology creates jobs in proportion to those taken over by machines so there is an equilibrium. In fact, traditional economics is full of so called "equilibrium theories" which might work out well in some overgeneralized mathematical model- but more often then not fail miserably in the real world.
The fact is, as the statistics are proving, humans are increasingly being replaced by machines more rapidly than new labor sectors are being created and it is just a matter of time before the service sector, which is the only major human employing sector left, will concede to automation's cost-efficiency and productivity.
However, all that is an aside as the subject at hand here is Technical Efficiency and overcoming waste, both material and with respect to human energy. Mechanization has today proven to produce more goods, faster, with less people. In fact, human labor is now inverse to productive output in certain industrial sectors... and increasingly so. This makes perfect sense. These so called "Capital Goods" are now becoming "cybernated" in that accurate motions and heavy lifting is being accented by learning processes, artificial intelligence and self-repairing mechanisms.
The ability to run factories 24/7 through automated systems rather than the traditional 8-5 human work day and hence working to create an abundance, free human labor, reduce many levels of inefficiency, increase safety and many other very positive results is stifled by the human Labor-for-Income system. Why? Because human employment is directly related to purchasing power and hence if people do not have employment, they do not have money to support the other laborers through demand.
The only way to maximize this new technological capacity is to revise or remove the labor for income system - a system that is at the heart of the entire capitalist model.
(B) Regarding "Corporate Multiplicity". Today, the competitive basis of the market generates multiple corporate groups, working in the same genre of good production, each fighting for the same market. This generates a multiplicity of goods which increases the rate of disposal and waste. Human consensus towards needs and wants is said to be a result of the will of individuals in aggregate. If this is the case, then the removal of the competitive basis of industry could result in a singular production facility and design department that, rather than fight each other in design, works to apply the best and most demanded utility in one shot.
Imagine the kind of efficiency and resource preservation that would be possible if all the cell phone companies in the world came together to share their engineering ideas and public polling, to produce the relatively "greatest" average cell phone, with the highest integrity known at the time. Removing the proprietary, "intellectual ownership" and patent claims likely could create an explosion of creativity and exploration of ideas on a vast scale.
It is mind-boggling to consider what we could be capable of if the intention was to build upon ideas- build upon the "Group Mind" - not work to hide them for the sake of competition. Again, in reality, no one person or group owns any idea in absolute terms as all knowledge is serially generated... no company invent s anything...they merely engage "usufruct" - so why should this false distinction have any place in Industry? We are simply dealing with an extremely outdated socioeconomic ideology in the world today.
Moving more quickly here, with respect to (d) Distribution - this undergoes the same basic rules of natural law logic seen in (a) noted prior. However, since the mobility of these goods are naturally going to extend to more people for use, rather than production centers, the schematic associated with a centralized placement of distribution centers (aka "stores") and means of movement (mass transport) becomes more multifaceted, but still the exact same in its logical premise with respect to spacial/technical reasoning for optimized efficiency and reduction of energy/waste.
For example, since most people live in and around city centers and given that most domiciles currently have basic plumbing and infrastructure connecting them to a central city edifice shared by all connected inhabitants, such a water & power lines and sewage, the construction of future homes should include similar interconnected mediums which are used to move small to medium size goods automatically from a strategic, regional (city) distribution center, locally. (same for material waste as well) If the item is not currently in the local facility's inventory directly connected to the domicile, the same logic applies on the next level transport tier up - meaning the connection of larger regional to inevitably global distributions centers - all logically assessed on the global scale not based on the locations resulting from the whims of slave labor exploitation, cheap land and the like, as they are today -but rather a global system of strategically, logically placed distribution centers that can automatically move goods through continental and intercontinental connections, etc.
By the way, all of this and many other unmentioned component factors could be calculated by a simple computer - no different than your rudimentary board games of Logic you find in a typical games booklet you might find at an airport bookstore today - where decisions, based on set rules, guide a pre-decided path for maximum efficiency and utility. This approach would reduce transport waste exponentially related to Distribution on many material and energy levels, hence preserving that energy to help create an abundance for the human population... which is party the point of all of this calculation towards efficiency. Every move towards the reduction of waste also means, if sustainable, the possibility of the redirection of that prior wasted energy/resources toward increasingly meeting and expanding human needs fulfillment.
And finally, to complete this truncated example, we have (e) Recycling & Disposal. Trash is a false concept. There is nothing produced by the earth, whether in the form of raw materials, food stuffs or even chemical compounds, that do not have further possibilities and if the circumstance arises where, say, a particular chemical byproduct is, indeed, without current merit and dangerous after production/use, the very merit of the production or process which produces that consequence should be brought into question and the search for a substitution should commence. Again, this is basic logic which, if the natural law reasoning was employed - hence the inherent laws of sustainability of our habitat and physical science - such known "negative retroactions" would not be tolerated.
That aside, the vast majority of waste creating landfills is not waste - all the raw materials and even the most used synthetic materials (IE plastics) have recycling processes today that can regenerate utility of the material. It simply isn't utilized correctly. A study out of the University of Utah found that Americans throw away enough aluminum to rebuild the entire commercial air fleet every three months, enough steel to reconstruct Manhattan, and enough wood to heat 5 million homes for 200 years.
In my personal understanding, which might be contradicted in time, all goods created should be returned to the original manufacture(s) once they have expired. This way, pre-created parts can be reused directly and other "broken" parts can be strategically redistributed/reformed for recycling by the related industries. This assumes a great deal of industrial sector interaction which is non- existent today, of course...not to mention the removal of the monetary system which would find little profit in such an exercise... but the natural logic is there.
Anyway - this concludes my broad, over generalized, multifaceted example which addresses the epidemic of waste & pollution. The point to note is that it is "system created" so it must be "system resolved", which is what I have tried to explain in short.
GJK: Would it take a total economic break down to facilitate the beginnings of what the Zeitgeist Movement envisions for the world?
PJ: It could happen with a rational consensus of the majority of the population. This is the general goal of TZM... To educate while the periodic crises inherent to Capitalism continue which will reinforce the need to evolve.
History however paints a sad picture. The problem is the psychological readjustment and, oddly, the advent of now "inexpensive" technology. The only thing that has held this system together, inadvertently, has been, ironically, partly the very factors that inhibit it. What I mean by that is the vast majority are "better off" than they were 100 years ago in the sense of material culture... material selfishness incarnate. This is a powerful anchor. The most belligerent quote common to advocates of the Market economy is that "people have a higher standard of living than ever due to capitalism!" Milton Friedman couldn't help himself from this statement, for example, whenever any negative consequence of capitalism is brought up.
Peter Joseph, "The most belligerent quote common to advocates of the Market economy is that 'people have a higher standard of living than ever due to capitalism!'"
Wrong. Technological development has little developmental basis to a social system or even periods of economic expansion or contraction. Science and information technology has a life of its own and while resources might find limitation at times due to the social unfolding (IE "depressions") the ideas always remain. The reality of "progress" in the technical sense has zero to do with market capitalism and everything to do with the natural flow of ever expanding scientific inquiry and applied knowledge. The fact that this evolution has occurred in parallel with the advent and expansion of capitalism, is mostly coincidental.
Yet, the illusion remains and the true dire inefficiency and reduction of relevant potential goes unseen - masked now by the Consumption-Vanity-Wealth Status Value System Disorder that has spread across the world. This is a serious sociological barrier to social change as the brainwashing, coupled with the fact that the predatory advantage incentive persists, creates a natural shutting down of anything that tries to move in a different path.
Second, the State itself, with its mass surveillance and military systems, exists to preserve the economic institution at all costs. The FBI, CIA, MI6, and all the other "intelligence agencies" are born out of preserving the financial state - the state which is, in effect, nothing but a parent corporation of all its commercial subsidiaries. A quick glance at the destruction of so-called "Soviet Communism" along with centuries of Western Economic Imperialism and slavery that moved the market system around the world like a religious crusade, shows how serious the major players of this game really are in their values.
However, nothing can stop the masses if they finally shake the delusions put forward by years of propaganda to support their own subjugation and the class superiority of the "elite". It really could fall like a house of cards if enough people really want it. As distant as that may seem, the pressures emerging with climate/resource/debt/war/poverty and the like today seem to show that a larger tide is shifting.... and TZM is trying to harness that growing global unity for change to bring the elephant down in a peaceful way. Again, we are all just people. The real revolution is the revolution if values. So, while "collapse" is catalytic, (if it doesn't go too far) it isn't actually needed if we can educate.
GJK: Around this time last century, dozens of political and social groups sprang forth, each advocating a particular direction for the world. How might the Zeitgeist Movement remain relevant amid the rise of well intentioned, yet unstructured groups such as Occupy Wall Street?
PJ: By its inherent logical platform. It is clear that we all are bound by a set of natural rules which, given enough breathing room, will present themselves for realization and elevate the minds of those who are vulnerable to acceptance. We humans need to stop imposing and start listening. We do not have any answers. We only have what the logical, testable world around us shows us. This is not a religious, new age or "spiritual" idea... it's basic reason. You want to stay alive? You need food air and water. So maybe polluting the atmosphere and our rivers isn't a good idea., Etc.
Most activist institutions, such as Occupy Wall St, the ACLU and the thousands of other ecological/human rights/political type groups do not have a frame of reference that goes far enough to see root causes. Most exist within the system... even Occupy, which is very radical, lacks any set direction in postulation that shows a reasoning that is rational on any relevant scale. It is posturing and moral outrage mostly, with demands that resolve nothing.
War will not stop until the Financial system of property and power is removed. Inequality is essential to the system. Political Corruption is not an exception - is it the rule. Criminal behavior is mostly economically related. The ecological problems common today are all based on profit maximization and cost-efficiency one way or another. The ongoing US centric mass murders we have seen recently is being generated by a vast dehumanization of society.... and Wall St as an intuition is not to be regulated - it will never happen as it is the ultimate microcosm of the predatory, market society. It IS the market system at its core root psychology and to attack it is to really attack the entire basis of the socioeconomic system.
GJK: There have been a few occasions where you've deflected calls to assume some kind of role as 'supreme leader' of the Zeitgeist Movement. Why is it important for social movements to remain 'leaderless' in the sense that no one person possesses unwavering authority over all?
PJ: Because logically there can be no such thing as a leader of anything. This is a cultural stigma and pervasive assumption where a group "must" have a "leader". It is fueled by historical precedents which, usually in a ex post facto manner, puts figures in epic, guru positions. Martin Luther King Jr. and M. Gandhi would have never thought of themselves as leaders... they were "initiators". Things have to start somewhere and as a basic requirement of action, particularly in those early periods, point people where needed to manage things...often they have charisma as well and could talk by default. TZM is trying to get a "Train of Thought" out there to take a life of its own. I think the guru "I know" position egotistically held by many who claim to offer solutions today only hurts the true cause and TZM's original relationship to a Florida organization centric to one man- is a case in point. TZM promotes an idea only - not an institution.
As far as culmination, TZM was an experiment upon conception. I am a skeptic but also optimistic. I consider myself abstractly an alien from another planet, here to observe earthly reality in a detached way. I had no idea anything would happen when the call for TZM was made in Zeitgeist: Addendum and I really didn't have a vested interest either way. What many don't know about me is that I am driven here by others' interests to see change and am personally rather existential and indifferent in many ways. I feel it is rewarding to try and improve the world but at the same time I detach myself as a realist, sort of like how Veblen did in his later, more cynical writings, from the outcomes.
I do what I do because I would, in fact, like to see improvement and feel an emotional compulsion to resolve problems...however, at the same time, I keep an external perspective and find solace in the idea that, in the words of Bill Hicks, "it is just a ride". That might be how I keep sanity in the wake of constant global absurdity and endless personal attacks against me. I see it all in abstraction.
All that said, I will likely not stop what I am doing and I hope most see that I am emphasizing a "train of thought" here - not a position that I "Peter Joseph" or anyone..."knows" what to do. None of us know anything... we only repeat & extrapolate from what we see around us. That is the new frame of reference... not gods, saviors or gurus. It is a group mind.
The true salvation of human kind will come from a mass acceptance and adjustment based upon the laws of nature and its inherent logic. Period. We have reached a phase of human evolution where these realities are showing their power and we can align or we can suffer. Ego must go for this to work. That is the new, "natural law" philosophy.
|
